Donald Trump pitched himself to voters as a supposed anti-interventionist candidate of peace. But when he reenters the White House in January, at his side will be a phalanx of pro-military Silicon Valley investors, inventors, and executives eager to build the most sophisticated weapons the world has ever known.
During his last term, the U.S. tech sector tiptoed skittishly around Trump; longtime right-winger Peter Thiel stood as an outlier in his full-throated support of MAGA politics as other investors and executives largely winced and smiled politely. Back then, Silicon Valley still offered the public peaceful mission statements of improving the human condition, connecting people, and organizing information. Technology was supposed to help, never harm. No more: People like Thiel, Palmer Luckey, Trae Stephens, and Marc Andreessen make up a new vanguard of powerful tech figures who have unapologetically merged right-wing politics with a determination to furnish a MAGA-dominated United States with a constant flow of newer, better arms and surveillance tools.
Trump’s election marks an epochal victory not just for the right, but also for a growing conservative counterrevolution in American tech.
These men (as they tend to be) hold much in common beyond their support of Republican candidates: They share the belief that China represents an existential threat to the United States (an increasingly bipartisan belief, to be sure) and must be dominated technologically and militarily at all costs. They are united in their aversion, if not open hostility, to arguments that the pace of invention must be balanced against any moral consideration beyond winning. And they all stand to profit greatly from this new tech-driven arms race.
Trump’s election marks an epochal victory not just for the right, but also for a growing conservative counterrevolution in American tech that has successfully rebranded military contracting as the proud national duty of the American engineer, not a taboo to be dodged and hidden. Meta’s recent announcement that its Llama large language model can now be used by defense customers means that Apple is the last of the “Big Five” American tech firms — Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Meta — not engaged in military or intelligence contracting.
Elon Musk has drawn the lion’s share of media scrutiny (and Trump world credit) for throwing his fortune and digital influence behind the campaign. Over the years, the world’s richest man has become an enormously successful defense contractor via SpaceX, which has selling access to rockets that the Pentagon hopes will someday rapidly ferry troops into battle. SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet has also become an indispensable American military tool, and the company is working on a constellation of bespoke spy satellites for U.S. intelligence agency use.
But Musk is just one part of a broader wave of militarists who will have Trump’s ear on policy matters.
After election day, Musk replied to a celebratory tweet from Palmer Luckey, a founder of Anduril, a $14 billion startup that got its start selling migrant-detecting surveillance towers for the southern border and now manufactures a growing line of lethal drones and missiles. “Very important to open DoD/Intel to entrepreneurial companies like yours,” Musk wrote. Anduril’s rise is inseparable from Trumpism: Luckey founded the firm in 2017 after he was fired by Meta for contributing to a pro-Trump organization. He has been outspoken in his support for Trump as both candidate and president, fundraising for him in both 2020 and 2024.
Big Tech historically worked hard to be viewed by the public as inhabiting the center-left, if not being apolitical altogether. But even that is changing. While Luckey was fired for merely supporting Trump’s first campaign, his former boss (and former liberal) Mark Zuckerberg publicly characterized Trump surviving the June assassination attempt as “bad ass” and quickly congratulated the president-elect on a “decisive victory.” Zuckerberg added that he is “looking forward to working with you and your administration.”
To some extent, none of this is new: Silicon Valley’s origin is one of militarism. The American computer and software economy was nurtured from birth by the explosive growth and endless money of the Cold War arms race and its insatiable appetite for private sector R&D. And despite the popular trope of liberal Google executives, the tech industry has always harbored a strong anti-labor, pro-business instinct that dovetails neatly with conservative politics. It would also be a mistake to think that Silicon Valley was ever truly in lockstep with progressive values. A 2014 political ad by Americans for a Conservative Direction, a defunct effort by Facebook to court the Republican Party, warned that “it’s wrong to have millions of people living in America illegally” and urged lawmakers to “secure our borders so this never happens again.” The notion of the Democrat-friendly wing of Big Tech as dovish is equally wrong: Former Google chair and longtime liberal donor Eric Schmidt is a leading China hawk and defense tech investor. Similarly, the Democratic Party itself hasn’t meaningfully distanced itself from militarism in recent history. The current wave of startups designing smaller, cheaper military drones follows the Obama administration’s eager mass adoption of the technology, and firms like Anduril and Palantir have thrived under Joe Biden.
What has changed is which views the tech industry is now comfortable expressing out loud.
A year after Luckey’s ouster from the virtual reality subsidiary he founded, Google became embroiled in what grew into an industry-wide upheaval over military contracting. After it was reported that the company sought to win Project Maven, a lucrative drone-targeting contract, employees who had come to the internet titan to work on consumer products like Search, Maps, and Gmail found themselves disturbed by the thought of contributing to a system that could kill people. Waves of protests pushed Google to abandon the Pentagon with its tail between its legs. Even Fei-Fei Li, then Google Cloud’s chief artificial intelligence and machine learning scientist, described the contract as a source of shame in internal emails obtained by the New York Times. Weaponized AI is a highly sensitive topic in the realm of AI, with concerns about potential negative implications. The media often seizes on opportunities to portray Google in a negative light in relation to this issue. The idea of engineers building weapons is now widely accepted, with a “warrior class” mentality being promoted by influential figures like Peter Thiel and Palmer Luckey.
Thiel, a key figure in promoting a conservative-led arms race against China, has advocated for the prioritization of working with the U.S. government over ethical concerns when it comes to building weapons. This mindset has gained traction in the tech industry, with Thiel’s investments and influence shaping the industry’s alignment towards militarism.
Companies like Palantir, co-founded by Thiel, have played a significant role in advancing defense technology and strengthening ties between the tech industry and the American right. Thiel’s associates, such as Joe Lonsdale and Trae Stephens, have also been involved in supporting Trump’s administration and promoting anti-China sentiments in various capacities.
The prevailing belief among this segment of the tech industry is that technology can solve all problems, leading to a focus on military advancements and the use of AI for defense purposes. However, the risks associated with military AI, such as increased targeting capabilities, are often overlooked in favor of technological optimism.
Despite advocating for maintaining technological superiority in weaponry for deterrence, history has shown that superior technology does not guarantee peaceful outcomes in conflicts. The push for increased militarization and weaponization of AI raises concerns about the potential consequences of escalating global tensions. In a recent interview with Wired, Stephens criticized the revolving door between the federal government and Anduril competitors like Boeing, while also expressing the importance of individuals transitioning from private industry to work on civil service projects. He hopes for the opportunity to serve the government and American people again in the future.
William Fitzgerald, the founder of Worker Agency, highlighted how right-wing tech hawks advocate for a techno-militaristic era, emphasizing the need for strength in economic, cultural, and military aspects. This aligns with a narrative of cheaper wars and drone warfare, pushing for privatization of state functions.
The new conservative tech establishment, including figures like Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, promotes defense contracting as a moral imperative and dismisses ethical concerns as communist-influenced. This aligns with a hypermasculine, jingoistic brand that rejects woke culture and embraces strength as a virtue.
Many in this pro-military orbit are culturally and religiously traditional, with libertarian influences from the Zynternet scene. The El Segundo tech scene, known as “the Gundo,” is described as a freedom-loving hub of hard tech focused on military advancements.
The American right’s dominance in online culture has been instrumental in reshaping the culture among young tech workers and countering anti-military sentiments. Layoffs and firings of employees engaged in protests have silenced dissent within tech companies.
Venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz is heavily investing in defense tech startups through its “American Dynamism” portfolio, supporting companies working on military weaponry and drones. This increased interest in defense tech could influence startup founders to pursue similar trends.
Joe Dempsey expressed his belief that investors and founders are likely to gravitate towards companies like Anduril and SpaceX, expecting similar successful outcomes. This trend is coupled with a growing interest in hardware companies due to high interest rates and a shift away from software companies, which have been losing their appeal after years of growth fueled by abundant venture capital.
The current political and cultural climate, which is increasingly accepting of weapons startups, aligns well with the tech industry’s focus on militarized AI. The Trump administration is poised to support this direction, with plans to prioritize American leadership in AI by easing regulations and promoting military applications. Trump’s intention to reverse the Biden administration’s executive order on AI safety, alongside key figures like Michael Kratsios advising on tech policy matters, indicates a favorable environment for the industry.
Brianna Rosen, an Oxford fellow, noted that the push to “Make America First in AI” reflects a strategic move to stay ahead of global competition, particularly with China. This translates to greater investment and fewer restrictions on military AI, consolidating the industry’s pivotal role in defense and intelligence sectors.
The alignment between MAGA conservatism and weapons technology has already shown promising results. Elon Musk, who contributed significantly to the Trump campaign, leveraged his influence to secure positions for SpaceX executives within the Department of Defense. Additionally, figures like Rep. Matt Gaetz and Palmer Luckey are poised for key roles in the administration, signaling a favorable outlook for companies like Anduril under the Trump administration.
